They are scanned from Dōjinshi "Shōjo no michikusa".

Recently I'm bit confused to how to spell japanese.
For example,

shojo = a virgin
shoujo (or Shōjo) = a girl

They have different meaning. but sometimes they are spelled same"shojo".
?? :3

midzki, macrons are dumb and shouldn't be used, just type it like you would in your own language :)

"They have different meaning. but sometimes they are spelled"

Spell them as they should be spelled in japanese, people in western countries seem to like randomly missing the 'u' out of words for no good reason.

And thanks for the scan, shoujo no michikusa = subarashiiiiiiii :D (or possibly subarashīīīī if you want to be western heh)

:3
Then I will spell like "ou" ,"ei" e.t.c.
If there is a custom way of spelling them in western style, please someone edit them.

Now wait a minute Radiosity, "people in western countries"? The missing "u" mishap is most likely thanks to the piece-of-shit Hepburn system (in this case, simplified Hepburn), which is unfortunately the "standard" way of romanizing Japanese, even in Japan. I'm Western and I don't use the Hepburn system because I feel it's inaccurate. And I don't think it's really fair to refer to it as "Western style".

No, I feel it's entirely fair. Most people I know of are too lazy to bother typing the u so they just leave it out entirely, thinking it's ok when obviously it isn't. Though yes, I also agree that hepburn is the biggest idiot-factor in most mispellings of Japanese words.

I also wasn't being particularly serious with the western comments, idiocy is universal after all, no need to take things quite so seriously.

I doubt laziness has anything to do with people mis-romanizing words.

In any case, macrons are far from the worst thing you can do. I don't care for them--they offer nothing over methods that don't make me load charmap ("shoujo")--but there are worse things in the mud of Japanese transliteration.

Probably the two major things that drive me the most nuts are writing eg. しゃ as "sya", and romanizing the particle は as "ha". These seem to twist the very notion of romanization, by taking Roman letters and then completely ignoring the sounds they represent. Writing じ as "zi" and ち as "ti" are up there, too. Hepburn doesn't do any of this.

Overall, comparing Hepburn to the other major systems, it's a lot saner than the others. (Also excluding the ridiculous parenthesization of ぢ and づ, but I've never seen that actually used...)

All aside, one exception--if an artist romanizes his own name, then that's what I use. If Jeff gets to spell his name "Geoff", then Japanese people can spell their names as they like ...

The reason the particle は is written as "ha" is because it's the "official" sound it represents. I don't see how it should be written any differently just because it's pronounced another way while being used as a particle. After all, it's the same exact character in Japanese whether it's pronounced "ha" or "wa". Going by your logic, it is in fact the Japanese that are incorrect in using the same character because it's "ignoring the sound it represents". This is why I feel it's better to be accurate rather than changing it because it's easier for us to understand (this is the faulty logic I have a problem with concerning the Hepburn system in the first place).

Despite my own objects I do agree that using the artist's own romanized name is preferred. As much as I dislike "Adumi Tohru", if that's what she wants...

The particle は represents the sound "wa". The particle は doesn't have the same sound as the hiragana は, it just happens to be written the same way; no doubt there's an interesting etymological explanation for this, but that's academic; they're not the same thing. It makes no more sense to write it as "ha" than it would make sense to import the English word "enough" into another phonetic system based on how it's spelled.

Transliteration is writing words using another writing system and its associated, general rules for pronunciation, and the letter "h" doesn't represent the sound of "w".

Going by your logic, it it is in fact the Japanese that are incorrect in using the same character

A natural language is never incorrect--it evolves on its own, and current usage is always correct by definition. Transliteration isn't natural language, just a mechanical process that someone came up with.

So は = ha, and は = wa. One is hiragana, the other is, you know, that other hiragana. Not the same thing at all, despite the copy pasta.

I fail to see the logic here.

One is hiragana--one of the symbols in a Japanese phonetic system. One is a particle. They happen to look the same. I don't think of them as the same at all; both their use and sounds are completely unrelated. (But yeah, I know that they probably come from the same place historically and may have even sounded the same at one point.)

Let me put it this way: transliteration is a primarily phonetic process; you represent the pronunciation of one language in a different writing system, to make it phonetically accessible to people who can read that system. (That's the fundamental point.) The way the words were originally written is of much less importance than how they're spoken.

Japanese isn't written principally with hiragana. 掬う and 救う are written completely differently, they're entirely different words, and they're romanized identically (thanks to Anna for that example). At the same time, other words are written the same way (like は/は) that sound completely different and have different meanings--上 for うえ, じょう, かみ, and they aren't romanized the same way. Romanization from Japanese is an inherently lossy transformation.

I agree with you bunnygirl. I think Hepburn system is piece-of-shit too. I'm Japanese and probably learned Hepburn system in elementary school, but then I felt something odd about it for the same reason you arguing.

Yes, shojo is different from shoujo (of course including pronunciation). And I think it's ridiculous to mix up these words thanks to Hepburn system.